Supplement to My Article "Hidden in Plain Sight" (Military Images, Spring 2019): JANE PERKINS

In a previous blog post, I shared a teaser video in which I revealed that I had discovered what I thought to be a woman soldier in a photograph.  Based upon my research of military documents, newspapers, and soldiers' letters and diaries, I developed a theory as to who she possibly was.  And so Mark and I tag teamed on an article about this photograph and the alleged woman soldier it contained.  It has been been published in Military Images magazine (Spring 2019).  Visit the Military Images magazine website by clicking [HERE] to learn how to purchase this magazine.

Cover for the Spring 2019 Edition of Military Images Magazine

Here is the video I shared previously.  It will be helpful when reading the article to be able to see some of the individuals Mark and I talk about:

I didn't reveal pertinent information in the video because it was a teaser.  But now that the article has been published, I will say that the photograph is of Confederate prisoners of war at White House Landing and that the possible woman soldier among them is likely JANE PERKINS.  Why do I believe this?  This military document:

So this document places her at the location where this photograph was taken during the time frame it was taken.  There has been some question regarding the date.  Perkins arrived at Point Lookout on June 8th, 1864.  Some have pointed out the date of the photograph was June 9th.  However, this date is merely a guess by historians.  I have also seen June 10th.  However, the photographer, Mathew Brady, never listed a date other than 1864.  Because of the presence of the possible woman - who I believe is Jane Perkins - I place the date of the photograph as June 7th, 1864, or prior.

There are several interesting tidbits of information in the document above.  First, officials listed her rank as private.  Other sources mention her as a sergeant or lieutenant.  However, this may have been an honorary rank given by the men with whom she served out of respect.....or fear.  I mean.....look at her!  (On the left)  She did have a very feisty demeanor.

Forget sergeant.  I probably would have called her general!

By the way, the guy crouching behind his unsuspecting pard while stretching his arm out behind his back tickles me.  You can't help but wonder what was going on.

And what about the guy who the jokester was crouching behind?  He has a very similar facial structure to Perkins.  Was this man her brother?

But back to the military record.  There is no unit listed other than "Va. art" [Virginia artillery].  A researcher noted that it was the Danville Artillery.  However, a newspaper reporter in 1864 said it was the 12th Virginia Artillery, which may have been the 12th Battalion Virginia Light Artillery.  I have not been able to confirm either case.  Her name supposedly appears on the rolls of the Danville Artillery (also known as Price's Company, Virginia Light Artillery) where she is listed as a driver.  I have not seen those records yet and am working to acquire copies of them.  Incidentally, a soldier noted in his diary that she had been serving as a driver.  A driver is an enlisted soldier who rides the artillery horses while pulling the cannon.  They are not teamsters.

Bloomer costume

There is also some question as to where she was captured.  The record says Hanover [Hanover Junction, Virginia].  Some accounts say Cold Harbor.  I've even seen Spotsylvania Courthouse mentioned.  The date of May 27th disproves both locations.  Furthermore, Jane was brought to White House Landing with hundreds of POW's who were captured at Cold Harbor.  So this may explain where some of the confusion comes from.  And while sources say she was captured at her cannon, Jane herself told reporters she was taken while fetching water from a spring.  She also said she was
wearing a bloomer costume.  This was not true.  Sources say she was wearing male clothing.  This is consistent with the picture where the soldier is wearing trousers.  Look at the hip to see what appears to be a mule ear pocket.  Besides, all other accounts say she was in male attire.  So she probably lied to the newspaper reporter about her clothing and being captured at the spring to perhaps show that she was not actively participating in warfare in order to gain more favorable treatment by her captors.

The prisoners in the photograph were shipped off to Point Lookout.  As a matter of fact, the scene depicted may show them preparing to depart. At any rate,  Jane Perkins went with them and allegedly gave birth to a baby there.  However, I believe this is merely a camp rumor.  She certainly does not appear to be pregnant in the photograph.  It is true that there are some women who do not show.  But the medical officer who suggested she be removed from Point Lookout never mentioned her alleged condition  So I don't think there ever was a baby.

A couple of details I left out of my article was that Perkins was supposedly a teacher and had lived in Massachusetts for a time.  My new research has uncovered information that calls into question these situations.  First, Perkins supposedly had to quit school as a young teenager after the family's blacksmith business failed.  So I find it difficult to believe that a woman with limited education would be hired as a teacher or that she would want to pursue that occupation.  But hey, if she had been a teacher, I'm sure the kids in her class would surely have behaved.  Look at her!  Would you have dared to act out in her schoolhouse??  The source for her working as teacher stems from the 1860 census where there was a Jane E. Perkins listed as a teacher in the Adams household in Pittsylvania County, Virginia.  Perkins told newspaper reporters that she was from Pittsylvania County, but her name was Jane A. Perkins.  She was also an Irish immigrant.  The Jane E. Perkins was born in Massachusetts.  Researchers theorize that Jane misunderstood and listed her former residence upon arriving in the U.S. instead of her actual birthplace.  But, there is a Jane E. Perkins in Massachusetts in previous census records.  She also shows up in the 1860 census in Massachusetts as well as the 1860 census in Virginia.  So how can someone show up in two census reports in the same year?  The reports were taken far enough part to allow time to travel between the two states.  So Jane E. Perkins was counted in Massachusetts, traveled to Virginia where she was counted again, and then went back to Massachusetts.  So I think this was a case of misidentification and that the teacher Jane Perkins was a different person than soldier Jane Perkins.  Research continues.

In my article, I mention that researchers were able to acquire a military headstone and place it at the grave of a Jane Perkins who was killed and buried in Hollywood Cemetery in Richmond in 1865.  After acquiring burial records from Hollywood, I believe this is the wrong Jane Perkins due to a discrepancy in age and place of birth.  Nevertheless, here is the headstone:

www.hollywoodcemetery.org

Click [HERE] for an online copy of my article.

Please note that these are mere theories that will likely never be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.  I do not know for a fact that the soldier is a woman.  And if it is, I do not know for a fact that she is Jane Perkins.  I am merely posing theories and providing evidence.

Until next formation.....rest.